Good Article in Salon
 

Ask The Pilot has a good article today. You'll have to watch an ad for a day pass, but it's worth it.

The ad is blocked on my computer. Can someone post the entire article (hoping it doesn't violate TOS)?

Excellent article - thanks!.

We won't be able to publish the whole article...since it is a TOS issue....but here's a small blurb:


Ask the pilot

Why have the airlines, who have the most to lose, been silent as flying becomes an increasingly squalid and unpleasant experience?

By Patrick Smith

The timing of last month's regional jet crash in Kentucky couldn't have been worse -- not only for Comair in particular but for every airline. On the heels of the alleged London bomb plot, the last thing the industry needed was a deadly crash. On the other hand, it was perversely relieving to watch the focus of people's anxieties so quickly shift to something tangible and immediate, instead of stuporously obsessing over whether nasal spray is a deadly weapon, and whether one's seatmate is an al-Qaida operative.

In the larger picture, however, little has changed. The Transportation Safety Administration's witless crackdown on liquids and gels remains in place, and a disturbing pattern of passenger vigilantism shows few signs of relenting. Thus far, no fewer than a dozen flights have been diverted or canceled over false alarms. On Aug. 12, a man was removed from a JetBlue flight at JFK airport in New York for wearing a T-shirt with Arabic script on the front. Several passengers became worried and complained to security. Raed Jarrar, an architect and project director for the human rights group Global Exchange, was denied boarding until he agreed to remove the black cotton shirt emblazoned with the phrase "We will not be silenced."

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

This article is perhaps the best one I've seen yet on the post-8/10 absurdities. A few more passages:

On the ground and in the air, we're progressing rapidly from a state of acceptable anxiety to one of mass hysteria. Such reactionary and self-defeating behavior puts much at stake -- your time, your tax dollars, your liberties and your toothpaste -- but what's scariest of all is that the traveling public appears perfectly content.

[...]

Never mind for a moment that murderous air crimes have been with us since the invention of the propeller, but what ought to make the hair of every American stand up and vibrate is how quickly the new protocols have solidified into what appears to be indefinite policy, with little or no opposition. There ought to be a tide of protest rising up against this mania. Where is it? Where is the outrage? At its loudest, the voice of the traveling public is one of grumbly resignation. The Op-Ed pages are silent, the travel periodicals have nothing to say, and the talk shows are busy analyzing Katie Couric's hair. Why aren't journalists, called in to report on these affairs, asking the obvious tough questions?

[...]

But if you ask me, the most deafening silence is coming from those who, ironically, stand to lose the most: the airlines. The willingness of our carriers to allow flying to become an increasingly squalid and unpleasant experience suggests a business sense of masochistic capitulation.

[...]

While I generally detest Salon, this is a pretty good article.

The ad wasn't a big deal either. I just got up from my desk, did something else for a couple minutes, then read the article.

Very well written and covers most of the important issues we want changed.

^ ^

This is the best article I've read yet.

He references this post which I highly recommend: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archive...he_terror.html

I would like to hear an explanation of why the airlines aren't fighting this. You either have to believe that they're masochists and want to lose money, or that perhaps they've been briefed and see the need for this. None of the US carriers getting slaughtered economically are saying anything negative about the bans.

My money is on them knowing more about the total picture from the inside than we do from the outside.

And if they do know something, talking about what they're afraid of would be the worst thing to do. There's no reason to point out a vulnerability.

They understand fully that challenging the government has a cost of its own, and most importantly; if this situation gets really bad financially for them, that Congress will come running with tax dollars to bail them out. Besides, their crews are exempted.

Any airline that complains will find themselves written out :eek: of any bailouts that may come.

Congress and the Executive branch don't cooperate that well. Complaining about the President won't get you in trouble with Congress.

Wouldn't they have more to gain by being loud about their losses because of the security issues? "We need the bailouts because we've been hit so hard by the TSA."

But I'm not even sure they are counting on bailouts. The last time around Congress put strings on it that limited executive compensation. Hard to believe they'd want more of that.

That is definitely one of the best articles on the current situation that I've read--thanks for posting the link. If only there were many, many more articles like this one out there!

Except when they're controlled by the same party, like...oh, say, right now.

I completely dispute your conspiracy theory that right now the airlines know something about threats that we don't. Please present evidence and then I will listen.

I suspect that the airlines are just trying to maximize their ability to continue to receive "waivers and favors" from the government--including, but not limited to, direct cash subsidies, loan guarantees, pension regulatory relief, and being able to dump their pensions on the PBGC via bankruptcy. My evidence is simply the fact that they have received all of these things from the government during the past 5 years and have not changed their business models in a way that will prevent them from needing such handouts in the future.

A cynic would say the airlines have already, for all intents and purposes, been nationalized -- except for Southwest, JetBlue, and a very small number of others, their business model demands continuous favors from the government. It's no wonder they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them.

I am a subscriber to Salon for articles such as the above-described one sans ads. Well worth the price of the subscription ^

Then they're taking a heck of a risk that the situation doesn't change in November.

I'm not the one saying there's a conspiracy -- I'm just saying the public actions don't make sense and looking for an explanation. Your explanation is that there is a conspiracy between the airlines and the government. Proof please.